1 |
Am Sonntag, 26. August 2012, 14:49:08 schrieb Alex Schuster: |
2 |
> Volker Armin Hemmann writes: |
3 |
> > Am Sonntag, 26. August 2012, 13:41:09 schrieb Alex Schuster: |
4 |
> >> Frank Steinmetzger writes: |
5 |
> >>> Unless the filesystem knows this and starts bigger files at those 512 k |
6 |
> >>> boundaries (so really only one erase cycle is needed for files <=512 k), |
7 |
> >>> isn't this fairly superfluous? |
8 |
> >> |
9 |
> >> Yes, I think it is. When you search for SSD alignment, you read about |
10 |
> >> this alignment all the time, even on the German Wikipedia, and many |
11 |
> >> resources say that this can have a big impact on performance. But I |
12 |
> >> could not find a real explanation at all. |
13 |
> >> |
14 |
> >> Besides that, it's not so easy to do the alignment, at least when using |
15 |
> >> LVM. I read that LVM adds 192K header information, so even if you align |
16 |
> >> the partition start to an erasable block size of 512K, the actual |
17 |
> >> content is not aligned. See [*] for information how to overcome this. |
18 |
> >> That is, if you believe the alignment to erasable blocks is important, |
19 |
> >> personally I do not know what to think now. It wouldn't hurt, so why not |
20 |
> >> apply it, but it seems like snake oil to me now. |
21 |
> >> |
22 |
> >> Wonko |
23 |
> >> |
24 |
> >> http://tytso.livejournal.com/2009/02/20/ |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> > because erasing is slow. You can not overwrite data on a ssd. you have to |
27 |
> > erase first, then reprogramm. Also, erasing shortens lifetime. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> Yes, I know that. But why exactly does it help to align a partition to |
30 |
> the erasable block size? I don't get it. Why isn't it sufficient to |
31 |
> align to the usual 4K block size, so that a block never spans over two |
32 |
> erasable blocks? |
33 |
|
34 |
well, for one, there are lots of ssd which have 8k pages. Not 4k. |
35 |
|
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
#163933 |